Have lots of friends hoping they get fiber in their Austin neighborhood. I can imagine the developer/tech community will have it right away.

Its amazing what competition does, when its allowed. The grand strategy comment is pretty funny. Sure it was, maybe on a 20 year time scale, which got kicked up to a 1 year time scale before you bleed customers moving to a new service that is better. Better because you ignored improving your own service.

As a fellow Austinite, I share the same sentiment. We're switching the second we can get Google Fiber in my neighborhood, and won't be looking back. Besides, I am not really sure where TWC hotspots are, and I don't know my TWC login, either. Plus, you're never more than a mile or two from a coffee shop, BK or McDonald's, which already have free wifi.

ah, another competitor on the block and they start the straighten up. keep on going google.

The problem is, they can't compete with what Google will be offering. They're hoping to throw whatever they can at the wall waiting to see what will stick - "free" wifi with a subscription - that still costs exactly what google will be charging but at a speed substantially less? I think they've had so little actual competition for so long that they forgot how to compete.

You have to love it when real competition enters the market. Suddenly "it'll cost us too much money" becomes, "we can't afford not to". Of the three Google fiber cities so far Austin is the only one I would even remotely consider moving to. If only it weren't surrounded by the rest of Texas.

Unfortunately TW is only likely to do this where they have to compete directly. The rest of us still get relatively expensive crappy connectivity as they have no incentive to update/improve infrastructure. Good to hear that some places in the US are getting 1st world Internet connectivity however.

TWC boardroom: Ok everyone, listen up. So we did a little research into this. Apparently there's a name for it, they call it "competition" (murmuring in the crowd). This "competition" thing suggests that sometimes two companies have to fight for the same customers or something, by offering better value and services, whatever that means. So I guess we're going to have to spend a bit of our infinity monies to make sure nobody jumps ship to this Google thingy. That's what we need to do, right? And we'll be ok?

Why can't TWC start rolling their gbit home connections to other places? They have the monopoly where I'm at in Brooklyn. Why not start beating Google to the punch? They'd be welcomed with opened arms everywhere.

Yeah, I'm currently stuck with TWC in the Austin area and especially after seeing that they are backing the CISPA bill I will drop them for Google ASAP. "CISPA has the support of AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Verizon, and a number of other companies."

“We’ve been rolling out our free Wi-Fi network across our footprint for some time now, as part of our larger strategy to offer significantly more value to our Internet subscribers,” wrote Jeff Simmermon,

This is a "look over there!" diversionary tactic.

It's almost certain that ATT is planning to twist arms and considering legal and political tactics to slow this thing down and get it tied up in paperwork for as long as possible

They won't sit and watch any exodus in their customer base without fighting any and everywhere they can.

Here in Chattanooga we not only beat Google to Gb speeds, but very well might get free wi-fi out of the deal as well. And it's not though Comcast trying to be competative... it's though our municipal provider.

I gotta agree with Stacey Higginbotham. As of right now, my basic Road Runner charge floats around $60. If Google offered something like this for roughly the same price, I'd be MORE than willing to say goodbye to TWC. The free WiFi offer is just plain weak. Free WiFi is almost everywhere; most big name restaurant franchises, public libraries, pretty much every coffee house out there, etc., so they aren't offering anything new to people that they don't already have access to.

It's amazing how reactionary these companies are. I'm sure someone in there is bright enough to go hey - instead of chasing Google how about we go do this in a bunch of cities Google isn't targeting yet? It feels like Google will have to go everywhere for these companies to try and compete...

It's amazing how reactionary these companies are. I'm sure someone in there is bright enough to go hey - instead of chasing Google how about we go do this in a bunch of cities Google isn't targeting yet? It feels like Google will have to go everywhere for these companies to try and compete...

I'll be honest, I kinda thought that was the whole point of this exercise. If it turns out to be a viable and profitable model for Google that's great but it almost seemed like when they started doing this the idea was kickstart some decent investment in infrastructure and the services it supports.

I could, of course, be totally wrong. Google may have plenty of it but they are not in the business of losing money.

This is the same company that offers "free home wifi" on it's top-tier plans. And in some instances charged for the privilege of setting up your own wireless ap.

Want to compete, TWC? Stop tacking on free shit you know that 97% of customers will pretty much never use, and lower your prices instead. By a lot.

I had to buy a "Home Install Kit" for my Comcast Internet/Cable, which basically consisted of a pamphlet with numbers to call to register, a Coax cable and a coax splitter. I own my own modem ($20 Linksys modem FTW!) so I don't lease one from comcast. This home install kit cost $25. Its basically the I'm-not-paying-an-installer fee. Kind of BS, but whatever. I'm saving $7/month with my modem and $10/month because I own a Tivo box and don't least one of their craptastic DVR boxes. I went through 3 of them in a year and had countless problems with them before getting my Tivo HD which has gone 3 years with only one or two problems that a simple reset fixed. Sure I don't get On-Demand, but who cares...

I'm still bummed that Seattle's Gigabit initiative misses my house by a mere 7 blocks. Hopefully the demarcation lines are "fuzzy"

They won't sit and watch any exodus in their customer base without a fighting any and everywhere they can.

Except by providing a comparable product at a competitive price point. Anything BUT that.

Listen sonny, this here is MURRICA. Capitalist competition? What do you think this is, some commie pinko librul facist state? Pah. *spit*

As Wikipedia says:

Quote:

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, AT&T is the second largest donor to United States political campaigns, and the top American corporate donor...A key political issue for AT&T has been the question of which businesses win the right to profit by providing broadband internet access in the United States.

That's their MURRICA. Not some company from California playing in their backyard.

Telecommunications in the USA in nothing short of an absolute mess. Apparently they have not heard about this new fangled '4G' networks. At least it's better than what you can get in the South DFW area (~3 hours from Austin). What's even stupider is that at least in my neighborhood, TWC is better than AT&T superduperfast (at 24 mb/s) Uverse is terribly unreliable, and AT&T's headquarters are *20 miles* away! You'd think that they would try something closer to home...

I am generally happy with my Verizon FIOS 150 Mbps speeds, but if Google came to DC, MD I would switch in a heartbeat. But we already got Comcast and Verizon both stagnating ATM with prices and speeds.

It's amazing how reactionary these companies are. I'm sure someone in there is bright enough to go hey - instead of chasing Google how about we go do this in a bunch of cities Google isn't targeting yet? It feels like Google will have to go everywhere for these companies to try and compete...

Of course there are bright people at these companies.. However, offering better customer service is not considered a good thing unless it involves better ways to bleed those customers dry. Giving free internet to city services in order to get easier access to infrastructure would be laughed at..

With so many mobile carriers capping data and artificially blocking network bridge functionality (unless you pay another $20-30/month to forward data you already paid for) I can see some use in this. It sounds kinda like what WiMAX was supposed to provide before it fell into disfavor.

That said, if I had to choose between a) current cable speeds/prices with a better chance of having wifi access in town and b) much faster broadband at home for similar prices, I'd always pick "b". Free wifi is already in place at home, at work, and at many stores/restaurants. Mobile 3G/4G easily fills in the gaps between.

Yeah, it's WiFi you pay for. That's literally the opposite of free Wifi. Not only do you pay for it, but you are paying by the hour. You know where you can get free Wifi? Every coffee house, fast food restaurant, gaming/comic store, (most) mall, and locally owned store you can find.

Why the fuck would you pay TWC $3 an hour for wifi when you can just get like 5GB unlimited 4G from your cell phone provider? The time it would take you to use that up, you wouldv'e paid the same as for Turner's "free" wifi

I appreciate the new competition being offered by Google, but I don't really get the attraction of more bandwidth. It feels like adding more megapixels to my camera, or more channels to my cable subscription. What I'd really prefer is to not pay $70 for an Internet connection. It would be nice if, someday, ISPs started focusing on lowering prices.

At my home, I have a pretty low-tier service from Comcast, and I never find myself thinking "I wish I had more bandwidth." Of course, all the ads tell me that I really need Super Duper Speed, yet we live on Netflix and are rarely bothered by bandwidth issues. Maybe I just don't know what I'm missing?

(Google wants to introduce whole new categories of services, and I get that, but until the services are broadly available, I don't see that impacting my day-to-day life.)

I appreciate the new competition being offered by Google, but I don't really get the attraction of more bandwidth. It feels like adding more megapixels to my camera, or more channels to my cable subscription. What I'd really prefer is to not pay $70 for an Internet connection. It would be nice if, someday, ISPs started focusing on lowering prices.

At my home, I have a pretty low-tier service from Comcast, and I never find myself thinking "I wish I had more bandwidth." Of course, all the ads tell me that I really need Super Duper Speed, yet we live on Netflix and are rarely bothered by bandwidth issues. Maybe I just don't know what I'm missing?

(Google wants to introduce whole new categories of services, and I get that, but until the services are broadly available, I don't see that impacting my day-to-day life.)

This doesn't deserve a vote-down; instead an answer to his questions would be nice.

I appreciate the new competition being offered by Google, but I don't really get the attraction of more bandwidth. It feels like adding more megapixels to my camera, or more channels to my cable subscription. What I'd really prefer is to not pay $70 for an Internet connection. It would be nice if, someday, ISPs started focusing on lowering prices.

At my home, I have a pretty low-tier service from Comcast, and I never find myself thinking "I wish I had more bandwidth." Of course, all the ads tell me that I really need Super Duper Speed, yet we live on Netflix and are rarely bothered by bandwidth issues. Maybe I just don't know what I'm missing?

(Google wants to introduce whole new categories of services, and I get that, but until the services are broadly available, I don't see that impacting my day-to-day life.)

Partially you may not know what you're missing, but you're still bound by the speed at the other end regardless.

The hope in this case would be that TWC's standard package ~10-15mbit download and their high speed ~30mbit both drop dramatically in price. 10mbit for $20/month (with some bundle) might be enough to keep them relevant while they build out their infrastructure. I know it's not validly useful that everybody have gigabit speeds-- something workable and CHEAP, without needing to qualify for a special program would be great.

The nightmare would be TWC leaving this market and abandoning it to Google and ATT UVerse/DSL. Most likely Comcast would pick up the cable service and having experienced Comcast elsewhere in Texas really enhances that abusive relationship with TWC. At lest when TWC beats me they don't leave visible bruises.

I'm in the suburbs of Austin, so not on the initial rollout plan. Likely I'll be on the extended rollout plan if they remain true to KC form. I can only hope TWC holds out until Google Fiber is available to me personally. (ATT UVerse is not my preferred choice for lots of reasons and their service nominally ends at the other side of the street although my next door neighbor talked them into verifying his house for ATT fiber. The only other local broadband company has very limited service areas. TWC is pretty much the only game in town for me right now.)

This doesn't deserve a vote-down; instead an answer to his questions would be nice.

For me, it's all about having the bandwidth to do symmetric HD video faster than real-time. It shouldn't take an hour to upload a five-minute YouTube video. It shouldn't be faster to run to the post office to mail a DVD than to upload a half-dozen thirty-second broadcast spots to a TV station. If my friends and I go out and each shoot a half-hour of video, we should be able to collaborate in real time to edit the final video. And I want HD teleconferencing with the home office from my home office.